The myth that "Only Edwards can beat the GOP" is dead.

[rinsd]

Now I am not crazy about Real Clear Politics'...well politics but they do compile polls and put them in an easy to find place.

RCP averages have Hillary by 2.4 pts over Rudy

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_clinton-227.html
RCP averages have Obama at 1.2 pts over Rudy

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_obama-228.html
RCP averages have Edwards at 3.4 pts over Rudy

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_edwards-229.html

Also according to the RCP averages, both Hillary and Obama lead the rest of the GOP by at least 3.5 pts including at least 6 pts over 2nd place Fred Thompson.

On edit: As for Rasmussen(who is accurate and posted here frequently), Hillary is within 1 pts of Rudy and Obama is within the MOE.

[thereismore]

1. Rudy is slipping overall? nt

[rinsd]

4. That seems to be the case both in head to head and for the GOP nomination

[SaveElmer]

2. Always been a myth as far as I am concerned...

I think if Hillary keeps campaigning the way she is, these numbers will only improve...

[Alamom]

3. ...

:)

rec.

[venable]

36. what do you know that pollsters don't? nt

as to the promise that hrc will improve, good luck.

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. Where's Wyldwolf?

The Hillary Cheerleading Squad is not complete.

[SaveElmer]

6. ANd where is the "hold my breath till I turn blue" crowd...

With their inevitable threats to vote Green or Indies, if Hillary gets the nomination....

Must be nap time...maybe they can come out later...

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SaveElmer]

8. Point to single instance...

Where I threatened not to vote for the Democratic nominee should Hillary not be the one....


btw: Thanks for pointing out my typing error...

[Alexander]

12. Point to a single instance...

Where most DUers who are not in favor of Clinton threatened to do the same.

Otherwise, shut up. :eyes:

[paulk]

15. plenty in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3321782

otherwise, shut up?

[SaveElmer]

17. Like shooting fish in a barrel...here are 151 of them...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3324011

Since it is forbidden by DU rules to call out members...I suggest you peruse the contents to find out the names of some of those doing what you say they don't...

Crow will be served in the main dining room!!

[venable]

38. is there any value in staying on topic?

I think there is: and the topic is 'Edwards lead means nothing'. and on that topic: what do you know that the pollsters don't?

[rinsd]

43. Here is the topic

The myth that "Only Edwards can beat the GOP" is dead.

[Nedsdag]

23. Oh, you're so sensitive.

I forgot to put the following in my post:

:sarcasm:

I was making fun of the typo.

[venable]

37. slap someone who has said nothing?

what's the point?

try instead to argue that all the candidates have the same chance when polls say differently.

[wyldwolf]

42. 2-4-6-8 who do we appreciate?? Clinton! Rah Rah Rah!

[saracat]

9. Yeah well, the latest Rasmussen and Gallup STILLL say Edwards is the one who beats all GOP!

[rinsd]

10. Pssst latest Gallup has Hillary beating all the GOP as well

And by about the same margins as Edwards.

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=27940&pg=2

[venable]

11. who has the biggest lead over republicans? Edwards, that's who.

does that mean he has the best chance? Yes, it does.

and this is now, with HRC and BO getting all the msm press.

when it evens out, I hope, in the fall, look for Edwards to rise even further. hopefully the party faithful will at least notice this greater electability.
I also hope they notice that he has the most progressive positions, more in line with traditional dem ideas.

he is the winner in this bunch, IMO, both in terms of policy and electability, a rare double whammy.

the naysayers can say nay all they want - the polling is unequivocal, relative to the standard equivocations of most polling.

[SaveElmer]

13. Who cares who has the biggest lead...

The point of the OP was that the myth that Edwards is the only Democrat that can win in 2008 is contradicted by virtually every set of polls, including Rasmussen which has been Hillary's worst...

Doesn't matter the least to me by what margin she wins...she would clearly, IMO, be a far superior President than Edwards...

[RaleighNCDUer]

19. I've not seen anyone say that he is the 'only' -

only that he is the strongest.

And over 18 months, anything can change - even Hillary's media-annointed "lead".

[SaveElmer]

20. Funny...

I'll chalk up your first comment to not paying attention...as posts with that assertion arrive on a daily basis...

What I find truly amusing is the notion that Hillary's support is somehow media anointed, like the 80%+ of Democrats that have a favorable opinion of her are being duped or something...while the supporters of the other candidates are the result of some kind of grass roots campaigning...so are more legitimate.

People here just cannot get their minds around a basic truth. Hillary Clinton is the most popular Democrat of those running this year. Polls consistently bear this out. And these supporters haven't been duped, they are paying attention, and her support is every bit as legitimate and sincere as any of the other candidates...

[rinsd]

21. Here ya go

Here's a reponse thread to this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3339944

Here's the thread that prompted my thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3338934

Again the language is ONLY not strongest.

The strongest argument is weaker than the only argument when all 3 are winning.

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. Thanks, but...huh?

"The strongest argument is weaker than the only argument when all 3 are winning."

I don't know what that means. The three frontrunners are all winning, so let's choose whichever, even though one is clearly the weaker of the three and more easily disloged? If you go to a horserace, do you put your money on the #3 pick to win?

I, personally, don't know why anybody is annointing or excluding any candidate, 18 months out. I think too much partisanship too soon could result in the undercutting of a good candidate.

Let's see who is the strongest candidate in 6 months, and who has a consistent message to oppose whoever the R candidate will be. THEN decide.

[rinsd]

28. Strongest vs Only. Strongest is the weaker of the two arguments.

Sorry I realized later that the language got a bit tricky.

"If you go to a horserace, do you put your money on the #3 pick to win?"

Sure when the odds are close, why wouldn't you?

"Let's see who is the strongest candidate in 6 months, and who has a consistent message to oppose whoever the R candidate will be. THEN decide."

Well I have chosen my candidate for the primaries but that is good advice for the undecided looking at electability.

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. Actually, strongest is the stronger of the two arguments.

Particularly, as 'only' is easily disproved, as the OP pointed out.

You have decided that Hillary is the strongest of the top three, despite her being weaker by the polls than either of the other two - based on the general election matchups. Her apparent strength is only in the primaries match up.

It seems to me you are focusing on the first ten yards rather than the goal posts.

[DCal]

22. The margin does matter to other Democratic candidates

Other Democrats running for office (Senate, Governor, House, State Legislature) in 2008 will be affected by the margin at the presidential level.

So, it may not matter in the least to you, but it does make a difference.

[rinsd]

24. So would you vote based on GE matchups 9 months before the GE

when all the Dem candidates are beating the GOP?

"Other Democrats running for office (Senate, Governor, House, State Legislature) in 2008 will be affected by the margin at the presidential level."

No other Democrats are interested in Democratic turnout. To assume Indies are suddenly going to vote a straight Dem ticket because they voted for the Dem for President is dangerous.

Now if you can prove that Obama or Hillary would depress Democratic turnout, then you have a case for John Edwards.

[DCal]

29. It is definitely a factor to consider

Many polls in 2004 showed Edwards would be a stronger candidate than Kerry in the general election. I voted for Kerry in the primary. So, it is not the only factor for me, but it is an important one. We cannot afford to lose in 2008 and the bigger the margin, the better, as far as I am concerned.

[rinsd]

30. Are you sure about that?

"Many polls in 2004 showed Edwards would be a stronger candidate than Kerry in the general election."

One argument for Kerry was his head to head numbers vs Bush

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/bush_vs_kerry_hth_historical.html

(Scroll down to the early 2004 dates)

This poll from mid Feb has Kerry with better numbers than Edwards

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/18/elec04.prez.poll/

[DCal]

32. As I recall, there were polls showing Edwards doing better

among Indpenedents and Republicans than Kerry. But, perhaps those were primary polls.

[rinsd]

33. That is a possibility.

Just because I was unable to find it hardly means it does not exist.

Let me know if you stumble upon something.

[SaveElmer]

25. The margin between the top three...

As has been shown is pretty small...and I have yet to see any convincing evidence that Hillary will somehow hurt down ticket races...other than "the feeling"

Jim Webb brought Hillary here into Virginia to campaign for example...didn't hurt him...

[DCal]

31. Some polls show a larger margin than the Gallup poll

and we should definitely wait until closer to the primaries to draw any conclusions.

But, I still disagree with your comment that it doesn't matter in the least how much a presidential candidate wins by.

[rinsd]

14. His fundraising is down and he has gotten zero traction for the Dem nomination (nt)

[venable]

39. that's not what's being discussed.

is it?

[depakid]

16. "Rasmussen (who is accurate...."

Um, OK.

:crazy:

[rinsd]

18. Rasmussen has done very well in the last 2 elections.

I would call that accurate.

[zulchzulu]

27. It's too early...ferchrissakes...

Seven months away until the first vote is cast...

[venable]

35. lame attempt to deny that Edwards is the strongest

why deny the importance of the biggest lead?

you state that you think HRC would be a better president. fine. others think otherwise. but that's not the topic on the table.

the current topic is 'who does the best'. the answer is edwards.

assuming the general election was held today - would you rather the candidate with the highest lead in polls and the best positive/negative ratings be the candidate, or someone with worse pos/neg ratings and smaller lead in the polls be the candidate?

your argument is really that you prefer HRC to edwards, so much so that you are willing to take a smaller chance of winning in order to get your candidate a shot. fair enough, but don't pretend your argument is something other than this, because it can't be, not with the poll numbers where they now stand.

[rinsd]

40. I would rather win with the candidate I support

And right now that can be any of the top three Democrat.

Though I of course support Hillary but there's something there for Obama fans. Indeed its something as Democrats that we should be hopeful about.

[venable]

41. I understand that

and you should do as you are doing, and support your candidate enthusiastically.

I agree that Edwards is not the 'only' one who can win, but he is - at this very early date - the strongest against repubs. That could change, of course. But today, he is the strongest. That's my only point.

[question everything]

44. I don't get it

Just from your post Edwards has a higher margin over Guiliani than either Clinton or Obama - 3.4, 2.4, 1.2, respectively - so what myth is dead?

[venable]

45. here's something not a myth: Edwards is the strongest candidate in the GE

according to the polls.

[booley]

46. Not necessarily

First, there are more GOP canidates then Guiliani and a theoretical Fred Thompson.

BUT even more importantly, you have to remember that the GOP CHEATS! Which means that all your poll shows is that in a fair election, all three main Dem canidates would beat the presumed Repub front runner.

But to really win, we need to do so by as large a margin as possible. So far that's Edwards from what I can see above in the OP.

Besides, I am not not supporting Clinton becuase i don't think she can win. I am not supporting her becuase I don't like her as a canidate. I support edwards right now becuase I honestly think he can win and would make a better President.

If it was just about winning alone, I would have joined the GOP long ago. They have always been about "winning" , no matter what the cost. Even when that cost is losing.